11 minutes ago, paco said:

historic investment in equity

Here we are talking about "outcome" and not "opportunity".

Senator Cassidy said this not too long ago:

Quote

"As it's going to be implemented, there are things that don't sunset, and it's going to cost $4.65 trillion on top of what the federal government is going to pay," the Louisiana Republican said on ABC News's "This Week," quoting an analysis from the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business.  

"One-third of the expenditures are tax cuts for billionaires," he added. "There's corporate welfare. It's going to raise the price of gasoline by about 20 cents a gallon. It has federal dictates as to how your child's preschool is handled, the curriculum...it's a bad, bad, bad bill."

 

Ignoring most of this for now, I want to focus on the 20 cents per gallon.  I haven't really seen this anywhere else.  Is this legit or was he throwing a grenade at 31 flavors since he was under pressure at the time from Schumer to tap oil reserves to lower gas prices?

1 hour ago, Dave Moss said:

John Snow politely explained it to you guys.  
Whatever, I’m done here.

He really didn't though.  He claimed that the math shows that Manchin is a swing voter.  I pointed out that the math doesn't show this.  The math shows that he votes party line basically ALL the time. But for 1 vote out of the like 300+ things he's voted on since June he didn't vote the way the party wants, and now some people want to claim that he has "power" and that he's a "swing vote".   That doesn't make him a swing voter, that doesn't mean he has power.  There have been other bills that have been voted on where he's voted along the party line and other democrats have voted the other way.  He has no more power than those other senators.  

Media sez Manchin is back at the BBB negotiating table!  Manchin sez

Quote

"I’m really not going to talk about Build Back Better anymore because I think I’ve been very clear on that. There is no negotiations going on at this time,” Manchin said, doubling down on comments he made to "Fox News Sunday” last month announcing that he would not vote to proceed to the legislation.

Not sure why people don't trust the media.

17 hours ago, paco said:

The page for it on the white houses website is a nice bullet point list.  Tell me which ones don't strike you as particularly leftist or sound like talking points coming out of AOC\Bernie\Warren\and the one other rando's mouth

 

• Offers universal and free preschool for all 3- and 4-year-olds, the largest expansion of universal and free education since states and communities across the country established public high school 100 years ago.
• Makes the largest investment in child care in the nation’s history, saving most American families more than half of their spending on child care.
• Delivers affordable, high-quality care for older Americans and people with disabilities in their homes, while supporting the workers who provide this care.
• Provides 39 million households up to $3,600 (or $300 per month) in tax cuts per child by extending the American Rescue Plan’s expanded Child Tax Credit.
• Delivers substantial consumer rebates and tax credits to reduce costs for middle class families shifting to clean energy and electrification.
• Ensures clean energy technology – from wind turbine blades to solar panels to electric cars – will be built in the United States with American made steel and other materials, creating hundreds of thousands of good jobs here at home.
• Advances environmental justice through a new Clean Energy and Sustainability Accelerator that will invest in projects around the country, while delivering 40% of the benefits of investment to disadvantaged communities, as part of the President’s Justice40 initiative.
• Bolsters resilience and natural solutions to climate change through a historic investment in coastal restoration, forest management, and soil conservation.
• Reduces prescription drug costs.
• Strengthens the Affordable Care Act and reduces premiums for 9 Million Americans.
• Closes the Medicaid Coverage Gap, Leading 4 Million Uninsured People to Gain Coverage.
• Expands Medicare to cover hearing benefits.  
• Makes the single largest and most comprehensive investment in affordable housing in history.
• Extends the expanded Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) for around 17 million low-wage workers.
• Expands access to affordable, high-quality education beyond high school.
• Promotes nutrition security to support children’s health.
• Strengthens the middle class through a historic investment in equity, safety, and fairness.
• Invests in immigration reform.
• Stops large, profitable corporations from paying zero in tax and tax corporations that buyback stock rather than invest in the company.
• Stops rewarding corporations for shipping jobs and profits overseas.
• Asks the highest income Americans to pay their fair share.
• Invests in enforcing our existing tax laws, so the wealthy pay what they owe.

Let me guess, the peanut gallery is going to focus on the benign ones like "Expands Medicare to cover hearing benefits" and ignore the overall bill.

Also "Advances environmental justice" might be my favorite 3 word phrase in that whole list   🤡

I'm really just making conversation. I'm always curious as to what people think is left, far left, right, and far right. For me I would consider most of these items left... far left? Eh not really. Far left Bernie AOC issues to me are "guaranteed housing", "guaranteed federal employment" and things of that nature. I guess where I draw the line is the difference between a social safety net for people falling on hard times and things that move us toward a cradle to the grave nanny state. I realize that line is different for everyone.

• I've thought quite a bit about universal pre K. I don't consider it "far left" any more than I would consider universal k-12 "far left". I think there are arguments to be made that universal pre K is beneficial to society as a whole as it would help more women enter the work force. However, like k-12 education, it's best left to the states and not at the federal level. 
• I'm not in favor of expanding health care subsidies. They do nothing to curtail costs. Just the opposite. I still think its best to tie health care coverage into employment with Medicaid for the extremely poor. I don't think the Obamacare exchanges are a bad thing though. It helps a lot of self employed people get coverage. This is one of those items I would leave as is. 
• "Reduces prescription drug costs." This is George W. Bush's policy and he actually passed it into law. If it's far left then so is he. 
• Tax cuts for children is no more "far left" than tax cuts for corporations are "far right". I've long said the tax burden falls too heavily on people who work for a living who pay income taxes. AKA the middle and upper middle class, and even the wealthy. Its not the approach to tax reduction for people who pay income tax that I would take, but I don't consider it radical either. 
• You can probably argue that the green energy subsidies are a loony lefty  flight of fancy and a big cash grab for companies like Tesla. I'm not a big fan of it. 
• I have no idea what "the single largest and most comprehensive investment in affordable housing in history" means or how much that is. If it is an attempt at the federal housing guarantee I wrote about earlier, I'll give you this one. 
• Biden talked about free community college. I don't think this one is a good idea either, but its not that radical. Community college costs are relatively low anyway. As someone who worked in higher ed for years, I'm a big proponent of community colleges for people who want to go to college. They are so inexpensive, we don't really need to subsidize them. 
• "Promotes nutrition security to support children’s health." I have no idea what this is or what it means.
• "Strengthens the middle class through a historic investment in equity, safety, and fairness." I have no idea what this is or what it means.
• "Stops large, profitable corporations from paying zero in tax and tax corporations that buyback stock rather than invest in the company". I'm actually staunchly in favor of this one. More of this please. If anyone want to call me a commie for supporting this, go ahead, I don't care. 
• "Stops rewarding corporations for shipping jobs and profits overseas." This is right out of the MAGA platform. If it's far left, then so is Trump. 
• "Asks the highest income Americans to pay their fair share" and "Invests in enforcing our existing tax laws, so the wealthy pay what they owe." Democrats have been saying this in every election for as long as I've been alive. It's just rhetoric, not policy. 

40 minutes ago, Gannan said:

I'm really just making conversation. I'm always curious as to what people think is left, far left, right, and far right. For me I would consider most of these items left... far left? Eh not really. Far left Bernie AOC issues to me are "guaranteed housing", "guaranteed federal employment" and things of that nature. I guess where I draw the line is the difference between a social safety net for people falling on hard times and things that move us toward a cradle to the grave nanny state. I realize that line is different for everyone.

• I've thought quite a bit about universal pre K. I don't consider it "far left" any more than I would consider universal k-12 "far left". I think there are arguments to be made that universal pre K is beneficial to society as a whole as it would help more women enter the work force. However, like k-12 education, it's best left to the states and not at the federal level. 

While I can acknowledge the potential societal benefits, guaranteeing universal pre-K is simply not an appropriate function of the federal government. If states want to start their own universal preschool programs, then they are free to do so. But this need for the left to try and expand the power of the federal government into areas where it has no authority (e.g., voting) is definitely part of the current far-left thinking which wants to centralize power in Washington. 

• I'm not in favor of expanding health care subsidies. They do nothing to curtail costs. Just the opposite. I still think its best to tie health care coverage into employment with Medicaid for the extremely poor. I don't think the Obamacare exchanges are a bad thing though. It helps a lot of self employed people get coverage. This is one of those items I would leave as is. 

Not only does this do nothing to curtail costs, it actually makes the costs of healthcare skyrocket. Paying for more care for all people simply creates unlimited demand which is completely price agnostic. It's basically the same thing these geniuses did with higher education. We need to be subsidizing LESS, not more.

• "Reduces prescription drug costs." This is George W. Bush's policy and he actually passed it into law. If it's far left then so is he. 

It was wrong when Bush tried it and it is wrong now. Let the market set the price. I'm so tired of hearing about "the pill only costs 15c!!". Yeah...the second pill cost 15c. The first one cost $400 million in R&D. And for people who want to vilify those who jack the prices of existing drugs -- blame the Orphan Drug Act which allows it. The answer to solving problems caused by government interference is NOT more government interference. 

• Tax cuts for children is no more "far left" than tax cuts for corporations are "far right". I've long said the tax burden falls too heavily on people who work for a living who pay income taxes. AKA the middle and upper middle class, and even the wealthy. Its not the approach to tax reduction for people who pay income tax that I would take, but I don't consider it radical either. 

Yeah, people who have kids should pay for them. Maybe it's a bad long term policy to keep encouraging the least successful to reproduce at the highest rate? If you don't believe me, watch the opening of Idiocracy. We should end all tax benefits for marriage and kids.

• You can probably argue that the green energy subsidies are a loony lefty  flight of fancy and a big cash grab for companies like Tesla. I'm not a big fan of it. 

Agree

• I have no idea what "the single largest and most comprehensive investment in affordable housing in history" means or how much that is. If it is an attempt at the federal housing guarantee I wrote about earlier, I'll give you this one. 

It means changing zoning and investing in subsidized housing. Instead of dealing with the real reason that housing is so expensive -- low rates necessitated by massive deficit spending. 

• Biden talked about free community college. I don't think this one is a good idea either, but its not that radical. Community college costs are relatively low anyway. As someone who worked in higher ed for years, I'm a big proponent of community colleges for people who want to go to college. They are so inexpensive, we don't really need to subsidize them. 

We need to stop paying for people to go to college with no thought as to the return on invested capital. All this will do is cause the cost of Community College to rise.

• "Promotes nutrition security to support children’s health." I have no idea what this is or what it means.

I'm guessing it means free food/more food stamps. Hard pass.

• "Strengthens the middle class through a historic investment in equity, safety, and fairness." I have no idea what this is or what it means.

Equity = equality of outcomes, not equality of opportunity. I'm very in favor of the latter, very against the former. 

• "Stops large, profitable corporations from paying zero in tax and tax corporations that buyback stock rather than invest in the company". I'm actually staunchly in favor of this one. More of this please. If anyone want to call me a commie for supporting this, go ahead, I don't care. 

They can spare me the crying. The large corporations don't pay taxes because politicians keep monkeying with the tax code in order to promote certain ideas or concepts. Then when Tesla or Amazon take advantage of it, they blame the corporations instead of looking in the mirror. Just accept that politicians are too stupid to pass effective tax laws and move to a flat tax -- when you have things like R&D tax credits, accelerated depreciation, etc. then large companies will win. I think the appropriate tax rate is 0%, but just go to a flat rate on GAAP earnings already.

• "Stops rewarding corporations for shipping jobs and profits overseas." This is right out of the MAGA platform. If it's far left, then so is Trump. 

It's far left, and Trump was far left when he supported it. Companies should be free to invest how they see fit.

• "Asks the highest income Americans to pay their fair share" and "Invests in enforcing our existing tax laws, so the wealthy pay what they owe." Democrats have been saying this in every election for as long as I've been alive. It's just rhetoric, not policy. 

The wealthy are the only ones paying taxes. This lie is the foundation of far left idiocy, and no one ever challenges it.

Added my thoughts/counter points above. It's very fair to say that BBB is the most progressive legislation since the epic failure that is The Great Society.

4 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Added my thoughts/counter points above. It's very fair to say that BBB is the most progressive legislation since the epic failure that is The Great Society.

Which is amazing since there are only a few leftist progressive randos in the senate.  The Democratic party is the party of moderates and not at all far left wackjobs.

47 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Added my thoughts/counter points above. It's very fair to say that BBB is the most progressive legislation since the epic failure that is The Great Society.

 I think we've discussed this bill more thoroughly already than the politicians in Washington have. 

1 hour ago, paco said:

Which is amazing since there are only a few leftist progressive randos in the senate.  The Democratic party is the party of moderates and not at all far left wackjobs.

Sure , two EMB conservatives criticizing aspects of BBB means it must be all far left policies

24 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

Sure , two EMB conservatives criticizing aspects of BBB means it must be all far left policies

Interesting take.

Just now, paco said:

Interesting take.

As is yours

Just now, Dave Moss said:

As is yours

Yes, universal ________ is so very right wing.  Attacking the vikas's and Gannan's opinions proves it.

4 minutes ago, paco said:

Yes, universal ________ is so very right wing.  Attacking the vikas's and Gannan's opinions proves it.

Dozens of states already have universal pre-k

 

Just now, Dave Moss said:

Dozens of states already have universal pre-k

 

Which states?   Many solid red ones, I’m sure

2 minutes ago, paco said:

Which states?   Many solid red ones, I’m sure

Ok, I should have said a dozen, not dozens

 

 

 

32 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

Ok, I should have said a dozen, not dozens

 

 

34 minutes ago, paco said:

Which states?   Many solid red ones, I’m sure

 

36 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

Dozens of states already have universal pre-k

 

And as Vikas said, if a state wants to do that then go right ahead.  Trying to expand the federal government’s power and authority into new areas like this is absolutely a far left idea.

I hardly think that trying to expand the federal government’s power and authority is exclusive to the left. 

6 minutes ago, Gannan said:

I hardly think that trying to expand the federal government’s power and authority is exclusive to the left. 

Nor is anyone saying otherwise. But this is a policy discussion.  

9 minutes ago, Gannan said:

I hardly think that trying to expand the federal government’s power and authority is exclusive to the left. 

Into social issues like education, it is. The left wants to expand the power of the Federal government in an attempt to usurp the autonomy of states. The GOP wants to expand the power of the federal government to violate individual liberty (Patriot Act) and corporate sovereignty (Section 230). 

25 minutes ago, paco said:

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

 

Socialist Ron Desantis 

36 minutes ago, Dave Moss said:

 

Not going to lie, surprised to see Oklahoma in there.

 

28 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

Socialist Jeb Bush 

FYP.  And given that Florida had 2 Democrat senators at the time I'd hardly call Florida "solid red" 

9 minutes ago, paco said:

FYP.  And given that Florida had 2 Democrat senators at the time I'd hardly call Florida "solid red" 

Ron's done nothing about it and, in fact, has actively and publicly praised the Socialist State of Florida, in effect praising the virtues of Socialism.  Socialist Ron Desantis.